Good point.  What version of Declude introduced the 'BANCSLID ON'
feature?



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 2:21 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] MS05-16 Exploit


This is the one that Andy pointed out:

Microsoft Windows Shell Remote Code Execution Vulnerability
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/13132/discussion/
Microsoft Windows is prone to a vulnerability that may allow remote
attackers to execute code through the Windows Shell. The cause of the
vulnerability is related to how the operating system handles
unregistered file types. The specific issue is that files with an
unknown extension may be opened with the application specified in the
embedded CLSID.

The victim of the attack would be required to open a malicious file,
possibly hosted on a Web site or sent through email. Social engineering
would generally be required to entice the victim into opening the file. 

I can't say whether or not it is a broad enough threat to be exploited
in a mass-mailing virus.  Declude defaults to BANCSLID ON which may or
may not protect from such an attack.  Some CSLID calls are entire valid
and normal for Outlook/Office generated E-mails, and I'm not totally
sure what Declude considers to be good to ban with this switch.  Andrew
previously indicated that he had never seen it triggered.

Anyway, these things pop up about once a month and most are never
exploited in E-mail viruses, so there is probably no reason to not treat
all of them the same.  I see no reason why virus scanners wouldn't
detect the infected attachments once they were updated with definitions
for known threats.

Matt




John Tolmachoff (Lists) wrote: 
Since I am pressed for time and am presently unable to completely digest
what the vulnerability is and how to stop it, how can we configure our
Declude installs to protect/find/stop these messages?

John T
eServices For You


  
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
    
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:30 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Declude.Virus] MS05-16 Exploit

Hi,

Enclosed a notice for the MS05-16 Exploit.

For the record:
I'm actually in favor of using STRICT interpretation of vulnerabilities
-
    
no
  
matter how seldom one might actually occur.  Whether a violation of
standards is due to an actual virus - or just a poor mass-mailer
application, I gladly use the reason of "vulnerability" of a potential
    
virus
  
to reject these messages early.

As far as some features suggested here:

- I do agree that it might be helpful for some people not to scan for
viruses, if a vulnerability is found (to conserve CPU).

- I do agree that there is little reason (other than statistics) to run
    
the
  
second scanner after the first scanner already found a virus.

- I do agree that it is desirable for some people, if there was an
option
that would delete vulnerabilities rather than "isolate" them in the
Virus
folder.

- I do NOT agree that Declude should NOT detect certain vulerabilities,
    
just
  
because they only occur very rarely.


Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:    +1 201 934-9206


    
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick FitzGerald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 9:31 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Spam exploiting MS05-016

      
Yesterday at least two of my spam-traps received the following message
(I've elided the MIME boundary values just in case...):

   Subject: We make a business offer to you
   MIME-Version: 1.0
   Content-type: multipart/mixed;
           boundary="[...]"

   [...]
   Content-Type: text/plain;
           charset="Windows-1252"
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

   Hello!  It is not spam, so don't delete this message.
   We have a business offer to you.
   Read our offer.
   You can increase the business in 1,5 times.
   We hope you do not miss this information.


   Best regards, Keith

   [...]
   Content-type: application/octet-stream;
           name="agreement.zip"
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
   Content-Disposition: attachment;
           filename="agreement.zip"

   <<encoded ZIP file data>>

There are a few trivial differences between the messages to the
different addresses I checked, so don't anyone try to turn the above
into a totally literal filtering rule...

Anyway, the "agreement.zip" attachment held only one file, apparently
called "agreement.txt", but on closer inspection it turned out the file
was called "agreement.txt " where the apparent trailing space was
actually a 0xFF character.  This "pseudo-TXT" file was, in fact, an
OLE2 format file (originally a Word document file) with the OLE2 Root
Entry CLSID set to that of the Microsoft HTML Application Host (MSHTA).
This was all done as per the description in the iDEFENSE advisory
announcing this vulnerability:

   http://www.idefense.com/application/poi/display?id=231&type=vulns

This "pseudo-TXT" file is an example of what is produced by the PoC
generator posted to Bugtraq.  Oddly, that message is not archived in
SecurityFocus' own mailing list archives, but its PoC code is listed
with the vulnerability's BID entry:

   http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/13132/info/

That PoC may be identified from the comment at the top of its code:

   MS05-016 POC
   Made By ZwelL
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   2005.4.13

Anyway, the "agreement.txt " file contained a script to write a text
file with commands and responses for use with the Windows ftp client
via its "-s" option and further commands to run ftp with those scripted

commands and then to run the executable that ftp script would cause to
be downloaded from a Russian web site.  At the time of writing, that
site is still up and the executable that is downloaded (a backdoor) is
the same one that was there when the spam was first seen.

If you haven't installed the MS05-016 Windows Shell patch yet:

   http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms05-016.mspx

or at least taken reasonable precautions to defang possible
exploitation of this vulnerability (particularly through MSHTA), it
would be  advisable to do so now.  When initially discovered, only two
of more than 20 tested virus scanning engines detected the exploit in
"agreement.txt ".  Since alerting the antivirus developer community of
the field discovery of this exploit, a couple more "big name" scanners
have added a degree of detection for this exploit, and I expect that
number to grow as the new week dawns and new updates are pushed to
customers.


--
Nick FitzGerald
Computer Virus Consulting Ltd.
Ph/FAX: +64 3 3267092


---
This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.Virus".    The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
    

---
This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.Virus".    The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


  


-- 
=====================================================
MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.
http://www.mailpure.com/software/
=====================================================
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list.  To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.Virus".    The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.

Reply via email to